You should be able to get close to the F bass sound with a fretless Jazz or P/J with round wounds using mostly the bridge pickup, that's just a Jaco sound on steroids.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Yet Another "How Do I Get That Tone" discussion
- Thread starter jazzgrowler
- Start date
I have Original Series Bartolini quad coils in my main 6-string bass. They're the "Deep Tone" models. My bass isn't fretless, but strung with GHS Pressurewounds, it cops a tone very similar to a few of the clips you've posted.
Completely different style, but listen to the bass track. The Deep Tone Quad Coil Barts sound very similar to this in my bass.
OP, upon listening to your sound examples, I think the sound you're looking for has less to do with the bass itself and more to do with how it's played and mixed.
first thing: I can hear a good amount of high-frequency, er, "crackle" in most of those samples. That's what imparts the "tuba" kinda sound. It's that sharp sort of fizzing sound that sits over the lows and gives it texture. Think of a peal of thunder: you don't hear just the low end rumble, there's a good bit of sharp crackling that sits over top of it.
How do you get that in a recording? First thing: fresh strings. Whatever kind of strings you like, make sure that they've still got that new string zing to them. That's the only way to get that sound.
Second thing: A very light touch. If you dig in, your treble is going to spike through the roof, and your background crackle turns into a spiking CRACK. You don't want this. Furthermore, a light touch keeps the midrange more controlled. I notice in the samples posted that, while they're all played on the bridge pickup and are kinda honky sounding, the midrange is really pretty subdued compared to the treble and low frequency. Again, when you really dig in hard, your mid-mids and high-mids jump to the forefront of the transient and drown the lower registers out.
Finally, the mix brings the sound of the bass right up to the front of everything. This is mostly to do with a big gain boost: because the bassists in question are playing so light, the signal is pretty weak relative to the velocity that the drummers and guitarists play at. To compensate for that, the bass has to be boosted up pretty high in order for it to be audible. Compare the sound of the bass with that of the other instruments in these mixes: it sounds like the bass amp is right in front of your face, while the drums and guitar amps are quite a bit behind, in the background. Most of the extreme high and low end have been rolled off of those other instruments, so that you can really hear the mellow low end and tuba-crackle of a bass played really lightly.
If you were to take that same kind of bass playing and put it into a modern metal mix, the bass would be swallowed up instantly and completely inaudible.
So, basically, you have 4 components: new strings, super light touch, gain boosted way up, and everything else mixed out of the way.
first thing: I can hear a good amount of high-frequency, er, "crackle" in most of those samples. That's what imparts the "tuba" kinda sound. It's that sharp sort of fizzing sound that sits over the lows and gives it texture. Think of a peal of thunder: you don't hear just the low end rumble, there's a good bit of sharp crackling that sits over top of it.
How do you get that in a recording? First thing: fresh strings. Whatever kind of strings you like, make sure that they've still got that new string zing to them. That's the only way to get that sound.
Second thing: A very light touch. If you dig in, your treble is going to spike through the roof, and your background crackle turns into a spiking CRACK. You don't want this. Furthermore, a light touch keeps the midrange more controlled. I notice in the samples posted that, while they're all played on the bridge pickup and are kinda honky sounding, the midrange is really pretty subdued compared to the treble and low frequency. Again, when you really dig in hard, your mid-mids and high-mids jump to the forefront of the transient and drown the lower registers out.
Finally, the mix brings the sound of the bass right up to the front of everything. This is mostly to do with a big gain boost: because the bassists in question are playing so light, the signal is pretty weak relative to the velocity that the drummers and guitarists play at. To compensate for that, the bass has to be boosted up pretty high in order for it to be audible. Compare the sound of the bass with that of the other instruments in these mixes: it sounds like the bass amp is right in front of your face, while the drums and guitar amps are quite a bit behind, in the background. Most of the extreme high and low end have been rolled off of those other instruments, so that you can really hear the mellow low end and tuba-crackle of a bass played really lightly.
If you were to take that same kind of bass playing and put it into a modern metal mix, the bass would be swallowed up instantly and completely inaudible.
So, basically, you have 4 components: new strings, super light touch, gain boosted way up, and everything else mixed out of the way.
Your bass current should be able to get that tone with out much work. I will agree the bartolini sound is prob a small factor. Most of the time it has to do with string height at the bridge-+. Most important may be plucking parallel to the fingerboard with extra light pressure.
It can work well in a modern metal mix.
It can work well in a modern metal mix.
Last edited:
I don't disagree, but I think if you also use "ground-wound strings" and "roll some of the ultra-high treble down" (as suggested in my earliest post) you can get a Pedulla ThunderBuzz to sound pretty close to the OP's examples.
Cliff Mayhugh!!! His tone is da bomb!
(And I have no idea how he achieved it.)
Thanks pellomoco14 for the string height suggestion. I haven't tried that yet, I will start today during my practicing this evening.
One thing I do know about string height is that some people I have spoken with about this, bass players included, in person at live music events, often mistake string buzz, even on fretless, (maybe especially on fretless since it's less obvious) for the type of blurrpy (I guess that's the term we're using) sound I am after. It can be a similar sound, especially in a live band setting. However, I always hear that as string buzz, which I don't like, fretted or fretless.
Other than string height, I have actually done "much work" looking for this sound on my current bass. I have tried different plucking techniques, plucking location, on board tone controls, amp tone controls, using EQ, compression, and various effects, and am just recently trying various different strings.
All of this work has been huge fun, and has taught me very much about my bass, and bass playing in general, and has been an adventure which has made me a better bass player. I highly recommend becoming slightly obsessed with some project, and carrying it through.
For example, I have found two tones or sounds that I very much like, and continue to use.
First one, I can get a very nice Jaco sound, including the overtones he used, on this bass just using plucking technique and on board tone controls, with my amp tone set flat. In a live setting I would also use some compression. Oh, and there's also the amazing control he had over damping. I'm getting there with that. The Jaco sound is acheivable, and is what he is most known for, unfortunately. I will never even approach his true genius with phrasing, both melodic and rhythmic, or his deep understanding of chordal structure.
That Jaco tone is in the same neighborhood as that sound, and very nice, but not quite there.
Second one, I don't usually use effects much, except maybe to achieve a contrast from clean tone, like for a different sound foundation during the guitar solo, or similar. But I found this one effect sound I really, really, like. Thanks to my amp setup, with two powered satellite speakers, I have heard what true stereo chorus really sounds like, in stereo. That's why I have two Genzler Magellan 350's, instead of one 800, or a Trickfish 1000, or similar.
This isn't even close to that sound, but is just an example of other things to be discovered while on the hunt.
Bridge Pickup in 70th jazz position or closer, decent roundwound strings and finger plucking, highs rolled off, that's it. No rocket science.
The distance from the nut to the pole pieces of a 70's jazz bass is about 31 9/16".
Oh, I see. Never heard it referred to that way. 70's Fender Jazz are definitely my favorite Fender basses. Can't quite put my finger on why, though. Other basses since then, including Fender, have really been better instruments. I guess nostalgia probably has something to do with it. I'm 58 years young, and a late 70's Fender J, which wasn't even "vintage" back then, borrowed from my house mate, was the first actual decent bass I played for gigs.
Last edited:
Maybe some of my difficulty in achieving that sound on this bass has to do with the fact that my current bass, Willcox Lightwave Saber, doesn't actually have bridge or neck pickups. The pickups are optical, not magnetic, using lasers, and are actually located in the bridge. Each string has its own bridge, and the pickup for that string is actually built into that string's bridge. Obviously, this is an active system, so any "bridge" or "neck" settings are all done with the active on board preamp tone controls.
Jazzgrowler-
That was contrary but its about 85%> technique. I remember the lightwave saber being very sensative to attack. The unusualy wide spacing could cause a problem relaxing between movments? I could get that tone for a little while but not with changing string too wide for me. Otherwise try using the slightest tip of your fingers without tension, silly light pressure compaired with what you may be use to. Then turn your amp up and THEN eq around this technique. It should be right there.
The accented notes are where the baked in signature tone of the pickup comes through most. Barts are muddy/dull with higher finger pressure. When its just an accent its a good dull and it balances the feather light pressure tone well.
That was contrary but its about 85%> technique. I remember the lightwave saber being very sensative to attack. The unusualy wide spacing could cause a problem relaxing between movments? I could get that tone for a little while but not with changing string too wide for me. Otherwise try using the slightest tip of your fingers without tension, silly light pressure compaired with what you may be use to. Then turn your amp up and THEN eq around this technique. It should be right there.
The accented notes are where the baked in signature tone of the pickup comes through most. Barts are muddy/dull with higher finger pressure. When its just an accent its a good dull and it balances the feather light pressure tone well.
Last edited:
After thinking about it that may be somthing of it. Its been 10yrs. since I played one.
I love it when people say that. They say it so much it's kind of a trope. Jaco dint need no fibe strangs! So I don't neither!
The gear Jaco used was definitely both expensive, and modern, at the time he used it.
I agree it's more to do with technique, although my plucking hand touch is fairly aggressive, and the tone I'm getting from my Barts is pretty darn close to the sound samples. I do pluck a lot over my bridge pickup, where the strings feel nice and taut.
I also roll the ultra highs on my amp's eq off some, and slightly boost my mids, - especially my low mids. I have an Aguilar OBP-3 in my main bass, but I generally leave it close to flat. I pan my pickup blend knob to favor my bridge pickup just a tad.
